Difficulties in Knowing the Reality of Brahman

by Jayaram V

Summary: Brahman is the highest God of Hinduism. He
is eternal, infinite, indescribable and beyond the mind and senses.
This essay explains the difficulties in rationally understanding
Brahman and knowing his transcendental reality.

Any attempt to explain Brahman to the satisfaction of a mind
that is driven by reason and familiar with the concretization of
thought is fraught with enormous difficulties, because that which
is inexplicable cannot be explained by any amount of reasoning and
logic. Brahman is beyond the senses, beyond the mind, beyond our
intelligence and dreams. Then, how can That be explained to the
satisfaction of an intellectual and curious mind?

The Rigvedic seers themselves had this problem in their mind
when they called Him vaguely as "IT" or "This" or "That." Brahman
is incomparable. Indefinable. He is both here and above. He does
not fit into any category that we know of. He does not present himself
in our state of duality except as that which he is not. So we may
speak of Him vaguely as this and that, but we are not sure whether
even such vague references are anywhere near the truth.

The problem of understanding and knowing Brahman is comparable
to our difficulties in envisioning the material universe that we
know so far. With its billions of stars and galaxies and interstellar
spaces that span express incredible distances, our material universe
is a great enigma. Even with our modern computing machines we cannot
truly measure its depth or dimensions. Its vastness and immensity
stretch our minds and challenge our empirical knowledge. It overwhelms
our sense of self-importance and makes us feel humble and tiny.
We may envision a part of it, or weave beautiful science fiction
stories using our imagination, but collectively or individually
they do not render justice to the true dimensions of the universe
in which we live. If such is our difficulty with the material universe,
which is within the realm of our senses, how much more difficult
it would be to know something which is beyond the limits of our
minds and senses?

The difficulty in understanding and knowing Brahman logically
is well explained in the Kena Upanishad. Even gods are not free
from their ignorance of Brahman (II.2.1). All that we know about
Brahman is that we do not know him, except for some vague knowledge.
Even after a prolonged spiritual practice and meditation, one cannot
truly conclude whether one knows him or not. If a person thinks
that he knows him, he does not know that he does not know. As the
Upanishad declares, to whomsoever Brahman is not known, Brahman
is known to him. However, to whomsoever Brahman is known, Brahman
is not known to him. He is not understood by those who understand
him, but understood by those who do not understand him. He can be
known only when one directly experiences him at all levels of his
consciousness. (II. 2. 2-4).

A person who is on the path of liberation needs great discretion
in his pursuit of Brahman. He should not incorrectly or ignorantly
pursue him or make him offerings, since it can result in difficulties
and lead him away from his objective. The Isa Upanishad warns the
seekers of Brahman not to resort halfhearted measures. It declares
that those who worship the unmanifested (asambhutim) Brahman enter
blinding darkness whereas those who worship the manifested Brahman
only (sambhutim) enter greater darkness. The right approach is to
worship both and realize Brahman with a holistic approach. In other
words, you cannot avoid your duties and responsibilities as a human
being in the pursuit of liberation. You must do your duty and play
your part in creation before you decide to renounce everything and
pursue liberation.

Even an enlightened seer like Yajnavalkya had a difficulty in
explaining the nature of Brahman and his creation. While speaking
to Sakalya in Brihadaranyaka Upanishad, he declares, "That Self
is not this, not this. It is incomprehensible for it is not comprehended."
In the same Upanishad, when Gargi Vacaknavi asks him too many questions.
he expresses his irritation by saying, "Gargi, do not ask too many
questions, for your head may fall off. You are asking so many questions
about a divinity about whom we are not supposed to ask." Elsewhere
in the same Upanishad (3.8.8) he tries to explain what Brahman is
not to denote his inexplicable nature, suggesting that he is aksaram
(imperishable), asthulam (not gross), ananu (not subtle), ahrasvam
(nor short), adirgham (not long), achchayam (not shadow), atamah
(not tamasic) and so on.

Why Brahman cannot be fully understood

What is the original state of Brahman? Even the seers do not
seem to have an answer. For example, in the Chandogya Upanishad,
Uddalaka Aruni instructs Svetaketu that in the beginning the Being
was alone, one only, without a second. In the following verse, he
presents the opposite idea stating that according to some people
in the beginning the Non-Being was alone, without a second, and
from that Non-Being the Being was produced. (VI.2.1). Thus, we can
see that there are genuine difficulties in translating the essential
reality of Brahman in human terms. To define him is to limit him.
Even when we do so, we must remember that it is for convenience
as an intellectual exercise to estimate the incomprehensibility
of Brahman. In the following discussion we will explore why Brahman
cannot be understood.

1. Brahman is transcendental

Brahman is beyond the mind, the senses and speech. He is without
name and form. You cannot quantify him or qualify him with your
thoughts and words. Even if you do, your conclusion will be imperfect
and incomplete because it a product of your imagination rather than
the reality of him. Since Brahman is the subject who supports the
mind and the senses and their movements, you can never know Brahman
in your wakeful state. You can neither truthfully conceptualize
him nor fully realize him with their help. On the other hand, when
you fully shut them down and withdraw from them, you will not be
able to remember anything in the state of self-absorption because
your mind and senses do not participate in it. Thus, knowing Brahman
with your intellect is a challenge. It is the same as knowing what
happens in a deep sleep state. You remember nothing about it.

2. Brahman is without duality

Brahman cannot be known in a state of duality. He is not an object
which can be known. He is known only ins a subjective state when
the duality of the known and the knower are absent. That is, to
know Brahman you must become one with Brahma, without any division
or duality. You must experience oneness, or the union (Yoga). Unfortunately,
the mind cannot experience it, because it can only grasp objects
and experience the objective reality. Besides, the subjective state
of the mind is not the same as the subjective state of the Self.
For the Self, the mind is an object of enjoyment or an instrument
of Nature, which it observes as its lord. For the same reason, the
knowledge of Brahman cannot be taught. Whatever you learn about
him from your guru or from the scriptures is but a near approximation
only and does not truly represent him. Brahman is a state, which
cannot be objectified without distorting it. Hence, as the Prasna
Upanishad declares, if you think you know him, perhaps you may not
know him at all.

3. Brahman is Infinite

Infinity cannot be comprehended with a finite mind or with the
accumulated, memorial knowledge of the mind. Infinity implies absence
of limits. Your knowing of an infinite reality can never be finite.
You learning and knowing must go on indefinitely. It may be possible
that even he may not know himself fully because he is infinite,
with infinite possibilities and dimensions. As the scriptures declare,
he is without a beginning and without an end. It means that you
may merge into the essence of Brahman, but you will never know the
boundaries of it. How far you may go in your quest for the knowledge
of Brahman, there will still be gaps in your knowledge and understanding.
Imagine how big the universe, and how much bigger must be that reality
which supports it as its very soul. As lord Krishna states in the
Bhagavadgita, he supports the entire creation with a tiny fraction
(amsa) of him.

4. Brahman is also the unknown and the unmanifested

The mind can only know the known in relation to what is already
known. To know something, it needs another object or phenomenon
with which it can be compared or contrasted. In other words, the
mind cannot grasp what is unknown, or what does not exist. It is
why we will not be able to fathom the future. Even if it grasps
through conjecture or speculation, it may not correspond to the
reality. Since Brahman has an unknown and unmanifested aspect, he
can never be fully known by the human mind. We may gain some knowledge
of his known aspects, but his unknown aspects will remain forever
beyond our grasp.

5. Brahman is before all

Brahman is known as the first being (Adi Purusha). He is uncreated,
self-existing and before everything, known and unknown. So also,
he is the only reality which remains constant when everything else
changes or becomes dissolved or withdrawn in the end. Therefore,
practically it is impossible for anyone, even gods, or those who
manifest from him, to know him and his state before existence and
after existence, except through inference or verbal testimony.

6. Brahman is the sum of dualities and contradictions

Brahman is complete (purnam). As everything as well as nothing,
he represents all aspects and dualities. There is nothing, which
Brahman is not. He is both permanent and temporary, transcendent
and immanent, destructible and indestructible, dependent and independent,
good and evil, high and low, largest of the large and smallest of
the small, with form and without form, with qualities and without
qualities, and so on. Hence, nothing can be said about him with
certainty. He can be neither diminished by deduction nor increased
by addition. He is always the same, like the hub or a wheel. Yet
he is without limits.

7. Brahman has numerous aspects and forms

Brahman pervades the whole universe. All forms and aspects of
Brahman are Brahman only. Each of them may have further aspects,
states, characteristics and qualities. No one can mentally or intellectually
grasp his diversity, universality and omnipotence. In a state of
self-absorption, you may know the essence of his supreme state or
his blissful nature, but it will only be limited to certain aspects
of him. It may help you vaguely understand his purest and highest
state, but does let you know his universal dimensions or his innumerable
forms. Besides, some aspects of him are subtle and beyond the reach
of even gods. It is why spiritual masters and self-realized yogis
may have realized Brahman, but do not know much about the material
universe or worldly knowledge.

8. Brahman cannot be grasped by mental filters

We are subject to egoism, gunas, desires, attachments, attraction
and aversion, which filter our perceptions and cloud our judgment.
Even the simple facts of life we cannot fully or correctly grasp.
We may have opinions about things or people. They are but opinions
only, not facts. When we have difficulty in understanding simple,
objective phenomena, how can we even grasp that which is hidden,
silent and passive. The scripture say that the Self is the passive,
witness and the ultimate enjoyer. For the Self, we are the objects
or the enjoyed. Hence, it is impossible to know Brahman objectively.
For that, we have to become absorbed in the Self by overcoming the
filters and the impurities of our minds and bodies, which in itself
is a hugely difficult task.

Classical approaches to know Brahman

In the scriptures we find two fundamental approaches or methods
to know Brahman. Of them the first one is a positive approach and
the second one negative. Both are useful and may rely upon both
inductive and deductive reasoning. However, as we will see below
both are subject to certain limitations.

Pramanas

How do you know that something is true or false? To ascertain
that, our ancient seers and philosophers established some standards.
They are known as pramanas or standard measures. The most well known
pramanas, which are common to most schools of Hinduism are four
namely pratyaksha (direct knowing), anumana (indirect knowing),
upamana (knowing by example or symbolism) and sabda (verbal testimony).
There are others, but these are the most common. Each method has
its own value and certain limitations. Of them, the first three
are based upon experiential or memorial knowledge and the last one
upon scriptural knowledge.

Direct perception or experience is considered
the best. However, direct experience may not always lead to truth
since the mind can be subject to delusion, ignorance, bias or the
influence of the gunas. Besides, everything about Brahman or the
existence cannot be known through direct experience since our resources
are limited and we have finite capacities.

Indirect knowledge through inference, belief
or supposition is helpful where we may not have direct experience.
For example, you may have never visited the Arctic, but you know
that it exists because you have learned from others, watched it
on television or seen its photographs. Since they are reliable sources,
you may infer that it must be true. Another example is smoke. If
you see smoke from far arising from the top of a forest covered
mountain, you may infer that there may either natural or manmade
fire. However, you cannot always rely upon that knowledge, since
people may not always tell you truth or distort it because of their
own desires, selfishness, or vested interest, as we see it regularly
happening in case of many news reports and opinion columns.

Knowledge by comparison or example is another
way to understand difficult concepts and truths such as God or liberation.
Hinduism heavily relies upon symbols, examples, mythical accounts,
icons, images and narratives to reveal meta physical truths of existence
such as creation of the world or the manifestations of God, for
which it is often ridiculed and criticized as primitive. The approach
has some limitations, but it is effective when the mind cannot grasp
complex phenomena. It is the same as using diagrams, graphs, models,
and workflows to explain difficult ideas, hypotheses or processes.
Even science relies upon it. However, one should be careful not
to stretch the comparison beyond a point and not to lose the distinction
between reality and projection. Without discretion, this method
may degenerate into confusion as one may mistake falsehood for truth
or illusion for reality.

Verbal testimony in modern parlance is the documentary
evidence. All the above methods are useful to ascertain experiential
truths, or those that are within the realm of objective reality.
However, what about those truths that are ungraspable by the mind
and the senses and cannot be experienced at all in the normal, wakeful
state? For example, there is no way of knowing metaphysical truths
such as the nature of Self, or God, celestial events such as the
origin of gods, or events that are associated with the beginning
of creation. According to our tradition, to ascertain such truths
we should rely upon the words of God only, who is the personification
of Truth and who alone is the knower of all. Since, God does not
speak to everyone, one should rely upon the scriptures, which contain
his worlds or revelations. Thus, sabda pramana, verbal testimony
or validation of truth by sacred texts, has a great significance
in Hinduism. Both the Vedas and the Agamas are used for this purpose.
Where the texts are not useful, the law books suggest that one should
seek the opinion of two or more enlightened people and go by their
consensus opinion.

Negation

Another method which is suggested in the Upanishad to know Brahman
is through negation by knowing what he is not. The method, which
is popularly known as neti neti (not-this not-this), is mentioned
in the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad (4.2.4) in the conversation between
King Janaka and sage Yajnavalkya, who says thus, “This one is the
Self which is understood as 'not this, not this.' He is not perceptible
because he cannot be perceived with the senses. He is indestructible
for he cannot be destroyed. He is without attachments for he does
not hold on to anything. He is unfettered, free from suffering,
and free from injury.”

For example, you can use this method in contemplation to withdraw
your mind and body and go deeper into the silent zone. You may begin
by asking, “Who am I am,” and each time keep on answering one or
more of the following until you are fully exhausted and enter a
deep relaxation state. “I am not this body, I am not this mind,
I am not the eyes, the ears, the nose, the tongue, the skin, I am
not the heart, I am not the breath, I am not the speech, I am not
name and form, I am not what others see me, I am not the owner of
the things, I am not the feelings, I am not the memory, I am not
the knowledge...” When you discard all that you are not and exhaust
all your answers and ideas, it may at times culminate in deeper
peace or even self-absorption.

Brahman, the Quantum Truth

The Brihadaranyaka Upanishad (5.5.1) declares that Brahman is
Truth (Satyam Brahma). While the assertion seems to be very simple,
problems arise when you try to understand or define truth. Is it
what you perceive, experience, or know, or is it something beyond
all that? Indeed, no one can truly answer this question. The truth
of truth is indeterminate, relational, and relative in the world
of duality, while the absolute truths are completely beyond our
grasp.

Even science cannot truly and satisfactorily answer this question.
Those who are familiar with quantum physics know that at the subatomic
level the essential reality of elementary particles is indeterminate
or indescribable because it arises only in a state of interaction.
In their natural state the subatomic particles exist not as constants
but as probabilities. Perhaps, they may not even exist or do not
have any specific location. Alternatively, the same particle may
simultaneously exist at different locations. Their behavior is unpredictable
and random. They exist only when they interact with something or
leap from one orbit to another. When nothing disturbs them, they
do not exist at all. Physicists are baffled by these contradictions
and are still grappling with these findings. Is is true that nothing
is determinate about existence?

It is possible that even at other levels, there is no permanent
reality, but only that which arises in relation to something, or
in response to something, or as part of the transformation of matter
from one state to another. If there is any permanent reality, it
must be the transcendental reality, which is beyond them, and which
science cannot ascertain, at least for now.

About: Hinduwebsite.com provides original
and scholarly information about Hinduism and related religions, society and
culture. We promote tolerance and the highest ideals reflected in these cultures.
We have been serving the world community since 1999.
More...